The virtuousness of adult playfulness: the relation of playfulness with strengths of character

By R. Proyer, Willibald F. Ruch. 2011

98 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BackgroundIt was hypothetisized that playfulness in adults (i.e., the predisposition to play) is robustly associated with the "good character." Playfulness in adults can be tested via a global cognitive evaluation and an instrument for distinguishing five different facets of playful behaviors (spontaneous, expressive, creative, fun, and silly). Character strengths can be assessed within the framework of the Values-in-Action (VIA) classification of strengths.ResultsData were collected in an online study and the sample consisted of 268 adults. A regression analysis revealed that adult playfulness was best predicted by humor, the appreciation of beauty and excellence, low prudence, creativity, and teamwork. As expected, single strengths (e.g., creativity, zest, and hope) demonstrated strong relations with facets of playfulness with its fun-variants yielding the numerically highest relations. The fun-variant of playfulness was most strongly related with emotional strengths while intellectual strengths yielded robust relations with all facets of playfulness. Strengths of restraint were negatively related with spontaneous, expressive, and silly-variants of playfulness.ConclusionsThe findings were in line with expectations and are discussed within a broader framework of research in playfulness in adults. The results indicate that playfulness in adults relates to positive psychological functioning and that more studies further illuminating the contribution of playfulness to well-being in adults are warranted.

Subfields: Literature and Literary Theory, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/484c1cfbcb1f853aca9ae82b2728bd7df4231fc8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Literature and Literary Theory

  1. R. Proyer
  2. Willibald F. Ruch
  3. F. Gander
  4. S. Wellenzohn
  5. A. Capezio
  6. C. Petelczyc
  7. Karl Aquino
  8. Lu Wang

In Social Psychology

  1. Willibald F. Ruch
  2. R. Proyer
  3. S. Wellenzohn
  4. F. Gander
  5. S. Restubog
  6. Lu Wang
  7. C. Petelczyc
  8. A. Capezio

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. R. Proyer
  2. S. Restubog
  3. Willibald F. Ruch
  4. Lu Wang
  5. A. Capezio
  6. C. Petelczyc
  7. Karl Aquino
  8. S. Wellenzohn

Citations in the corpus